This thread has some great stuff in it. Truly cutting edge wisdom for that last 30 seconds from getting visual to the point where you pull in the reversers and are committed.Yep, that's after touchdown.
and it centers around this from
Australopithecus and all the similar posts:
"A good general rule is that it should take two yes votes at all times. A single “no” should be enough to trigger a safer course of action. If the F/O calls for example, “not stable”, are you going to argue or go around? CRM does not allow for a single ego operation"
It's a two crew machine and the existence of doubt is just the same as excessive sink rate, glide slope deviation or the many other parameters which violate the concept of a safe stable approach . That's the 'EXISTENCE" of doubt not the fact of a reason for doubt. Doubt is itself a reason. A well flown missed approach or rejected landing would have saved countless lives over the years. Reliance on "The Captain is in command" rarely so. When you're cleared for approach you are also cleared for the missed approach or rejected landing. Even a junior Second Officer in the jump seat might have seen something you didn't. And even if you chalk up a missed approach which might cost you 10 minutes and a couple of grand in fuel, big deal.
If you think giving instructions is the key to your manhood get a job with IKEA. This isn't war. The best decisions a civil captain can make are NOT to do something or to delay while something else (de-ice, refuel, wait for a squall to pass, malfunction rectification etc) is done. Rarely, if ever, is the safest option the "I am the Captain" instruction to proceed when others are voicing doubts.
I'd be happy to start a thread listing accidents where, when crossing the fence, someone was unhappy but either didn't speak up or wasn't listened to. It'd be a bloody long thread. And as Davies said 50 years ago in "Handling the Big Jets" if you do crash, and survive, you'll spend the rest of your life wishing you had that 30 seconds to live over again.